photo credit: Dakimapics
There are no shortage of ‘experts’ that claim to know the secret of maximum productivity. At first someone will swear that the only way to really get things done is to multi-task: more done, less time. Then immediately someone will counter that it’s far simpler, more effective and rewarding and ultimately more ‘zen’ to do one task at a time: single-tasking.
It’s time to stop the confusion. Is one method really better than the other or does it just depend on the individual using either method?
Let’s clear things up, shall we:
Single-tasking: Do one thing at a time to be more effective
Ah, the age-old art of doing less to achieve more. This has been beaten to death for centuries. When you focus all of your efforts on just one thing, it’s assumed you will complete it to the best of your ability. While this is mostly the case, single-tasking is significantly more time consuming. If you want to create a masterpiece it will take time. So much time, in fact, that you might lose track of your other assignments.
There are even times when you’ll be trying to complete a task, and still be unable to tackle it. This, of course, leaves the task uncompleted and you having accomplished less than expected.
Despite getting only one thing done at a time as opposed to many things, the return on that one thing will no doubt be tremendous. All the work you put into the task will be reflected in how effectively you completed it. There will also be a greater sense of reward having completed something start to finish and these small victories, on a daily basis, can ultimately have a very positive mental effect.
Multi-tasking: Do more in less time.
That’s the basic idea of muti-tasking. Though personal development sites collectively hail that single-tasking is more effective (heck, even I support it), multi-tasking is still effective in getting things done. To be fair, multi-tasking has benefits that doing one thing at a time doesn’t.
As I’ve stated above, you get more done. A perfectly legitimate example is that you’re working on a project for your business and you also have a baby to take care of. Will you just drop caring for the baby while you finish that big project? Or will you nuture your little bundle of joy at the risk of losing your job? Better yet, would you fare better to manage both simultaneously? I don’t know about you, but the last choice looks the best to me.
Though multi-tasking does have its benefits, there are times when it can get a bit overwhelming. Taking on a lot of difficult projects at once is definitely not a good idea. By doing this, you spread yourself too thin and the law of diminishing returns begins to kick in.
Which Method is Better?
Both methods clearly have their respective pitfalls, but which method comes out on top? Single-tasking allows you to zero in on a task and get it done sufficiently, but multi-tasking gives you a wider range in which to get your tasks done at the expense of depth of understanding.
The answer then, lies not in the general, but the specific – as with most things in life. Different tasks, assigned by different people with different expectations, must be looked at on a case-by- case basis. There is no blanket answer as no two situations nor two people are alike.
Why Not Do Both?
Is there are rule that explicitly states that, “Thou shalt not single-task and multi-task at the same time?” Neither method is better than the other because they are both useful in getting things done. You don’t have to multi-task two big things in order to get them done quicker, because it’s possible that you’ll fail at completing both of them. Spending your valuable time single-tasking small problems can lead to overestimating them.
The solution is to multi-task the small things and single-task the big things. However, what if there are two large tasks to do? Should you still multi-task? The short answer is yes. Break up both tasks into smaller tasks and do them simultaneously. The long answer is that it depends on the task and which one you think requires more attention than the other. Some things aren’t easy to chop into chunks and can only be single-tasked, whereas some things can only be multi-tasked.
Multi-task or Single-task? The choice is yours
Not everyone can multi-task. It’s not a matter of brain capacity or time management skills. Some of us just feel that it’s more convenient to do a single task until it’s done. In addition, not everyone is comfortable with single-tasking. Some people just have to do something else in order to periodically take their mind off of the task at hand; they can’t sit still and focus on one thing at time.
But it doesn’t matter what I say. Nor does it matter what any other personal development blogger might tell you. No one way is “the” way to go. Both methods are very person specific, knowing what type of person you are will dictate your choices. The important point is to honestly evaluate your strengths, weaknesses and work habits, and approach each task conscious of these traits. Then experiment with different combinations to suit your needs.
Which do YOU think is better? Share your thoughts in the comments section.
John Anyasor is a guest blogger for PickTheBrain who writes for the HiLife2B: Blog on Personal Improvement for a Good Life. He gives advice on personal development, life lessons, college life tips, and more.
Don’t Forget To Follow PickTheBrain on Twitter!
Want to Learn How To Get Motivated? Click Here!
Related Articles:
Triple Your Productivity Tomorrow
Thanks PicktheBrain staff for giving me the chance to guest post.
Ummm… I think for me it’s better to multi-task cuz it keeps the brain more active and interested than being so focused on one thing?
You’re very welcome, John…
“Multi-task or Single-task? The choice is yours” was one of your sub headings. Well, no, not always. As a working parent sometimes there is no choice, on a day to day basis, although I recognise that lifestyle choices I have made make me more likely to be in that situation at some times.
Occasionally too, when I find myself stuck somewhere, I end up with just one task to do as I cannot go and get another. Bliss!
You do, however make good points. It is best to be adaptable and able to do either and make intelegent choices when you can.
I think that the one thing that most people forget is that our brains are only capable of holding a single thought at a time. In that sense, multitasking is a misnomer: you’re not doing multiple tasks simultaneously, you’re quickly switching between multiple processes (to use a computer metaphor). Once I realized that, I came up with a solution that I think holds in general: chunk tiny, tasks that require less concentration together so that you can do them one after the after. Since they’re less demanding, interruptions are less demanding (taking care of the baby). But anything that will take up a long time or require thought (writing, research, programming) needs to get a larger section of alone time with your brain. Following these guidelines in daily life as a student has helped me greatly.
@ Pol
Thanks for the constructive criticism. Again, it really depends on the person and what you can handle at any given time. I should do more research on working parents.
@ Basu
Interesting thoughts on multitasking as a misnomer. I never thought of it that way.
I’m glad I could help you out. Thanks for commenting guys!
It depends on the type of task that you’re carrying out. You can multi-task if you’re doing simple, mundane chores, such as putting the dishes in the dish washer, then putting the clothes in the dryer, and so on.
For more complex tasks, you really do yourself a disservice by not giving that task 100% of your attention. Each time you take your focus off of the task, you need some time for the brain to reacquaint itself with what you were doing.
Of course, if there are extraneous circumstances to consider, such as having to take care of a child while working on a complicated project, you have to find a way to do both. But you won’t be working under optimal conditions.
Great thoughts Marelisa. That’s what I was getting at in the article. Thanks for your insights.
[...] Is it Better to Single-Task or Multi-Task? @ PicktheBrain [...]
There is only one answer to this question…single task.
I think John points out what is the popular thinking about this topic, (to make his multi-tasking readers comfortable?) and even concedes that if it is a big task, single task. But he suggests that multi-tasking works too, even on big projects broken into pieces. I could not disagree more.
There is no science that I can find that supports this conclusion. If it is important learning, a major project, or anything that must be remembered or recalled later, or assimilated into a body of knowledge you need for your work, there is no science to support multi-tasking.
Read RAPT by Winifred Gallagher.
You might find this post interesting:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/07/060726083302.htm
Sure, even I multi-task when I clean the dishwasher while making the kids mac & cheese, but anything more important than that deserves your full attention if you want it done well, that is what the science clearly suggests.
Hey Jeff,
I understand what you mean when you say that I’m trying to comfort my multi-tasking readers, I did it because I wanted to see the benefits of both sides.
While no science supports this conclusion, science is not the be all end all of life.
If someone likes multi-tasking better, can science explain why that person likes it? Sure single-tasking is more effective for most people, but people have trained themselves to work well while multi-tasking.
Here’s an article containing a business women’s testimony of how she multi-tasks:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4181/is_20051129/ai_n15871071/
I’m not going to say multi-tasking is bad, because it’s not in my opinion. If I want to get a few things out of the way, I multi-task.
It’s up to the individual to decide when to single-task and when to multi-task. I don’t support talking on a cellphone and listening to the radio while driving a car on the freeway. I do support getting multiple small tasks done quickly in order to free up time for more important things.
The key really is to reduce task switching and thrashing.
It’s also about the startup cost of switching and the cost of swapping back and forth. I have a lot of long single tasks, where there are perfect opportunities to swap out and make progress on other workstreams.
So you’re right … both have their place.
Multi-task or single-task ?
Are you sure this is the right question?
We listen, see, smell, feel all the time.
We are always multitasking, even during our sleep (when ideas pop-up at the morning).
Then even to concentrate, one task at a time, is not possible to 100%
And when the baby suddenly silent, the alarms light on : what does it do?
When the baby is on our knees, and that we continue to work, it is hard to be 100% working and 100% over the baby. And what about the working time ?
)
I do not think it is shorter.
Especially when he, the baby, is agitating his little fingers on the keyboard.
Be on the present time is, like the hell, difficult, because of the multi-task.
Clear your mind, no thinking ! says the buddhist who meditates.
Be on what you do, at the time you do it !
To be truly present.
When it is possible to break the multi-task
))
And stop the wave of the day life.
B. Majour
@ J.D. Meier
Thanks for agreeing with with me. There isn’t just one way to carry out tasks.
@ B. Majour
“Be on what you do, at the time you do it.” That’s a great statement. I agree that this a complex take on tasking that’s interesting to define.
It’s nice to see some healthy debate on which style of tasking is better.
Thanks for the opinions guys.
when multitasking I think some actions/tasks are more habit – making the best, fixing dinner – that it enables us to do other things at the same time. Often, I read while cooking dinner or washing clothes. I’m not thinking about both things simultaneously.
Anyway, when trying to do multiple things, I think you have to be aware of what they are and the impact to your goals/objectives. I never do other things while writing, because I need to focus my concentrations.
Great article and thanks for making me think.
I think a lot of this depends on your personality. I, personally, like to break up the monotony with working on possibly two different projects at a time, switching back and forth as suggested in this post. It’s refreshing to see a both/and versus either/or approach.
I get what you mean. It’s sort of an automated response that takes place whether or not you’re thinking about it.
You’re welcome. I hope to make you think more in the future.
From my experience, I would define things a bit more and say : do multitask on higher horizon levels, but only single-tasks on the everyday level. Let me explain.
It’s OK that during a month I’m following multiple goals (like finishing two projects and raising a kid) – so I’m multitasking here -, but I only do that in small steps, and each small step is single-task.
More specific, I have 3 projects, and each day I’m taking care of project A from 9 to 12, then project B from 12 to 14 and then project C from 14 to 16 (single task here !).
We cannot categorically say one of them is better than the other. It depends on the nature or type of work you are doing. Say you are working in the kitchen. It is easier and saves time to multi task. For example, while you are cooking you can simultaneously fill drinking water in the bottles. If you are developing a software program, then multi-tasking will spoil your software program development, software development needs concentrations.
So whether multi-tasking is better or single-tasking is better depends on the nature of the work you are doing.
Sundaram
It better to single task than multi task , because you effort, energy , concentration and focus will be dispersed to widely and you will get nothing done.
Any thoughts?
I actually asked my sister yesterday and she preferred multi-tasking over single-tasking, and stated that the time it takes to multi-task isn’t worth it.
See? Everything isn’t so easy to split into categories.
[...] There has long been a debate over what allows one to be more productive, if you tackle one task at a time or handle several at once. Well, I’m not here to add to that debate…I’m here to end it. If your task at this juncture is to become a well-rounded Eventualist, then you simply must do more than just that one task – you must do as many as you can. [...]
[...] Is It Better To Single-Task Or Multi-Task? [...]
Is It Better To Single-Task or Multi-Task? …
Is It Better To Single-Task or Multi-Task?…
I’ve tried out every diet under the sun but nothing worked as well as acai berry. I know they say that pills don’t work, nevertheless
they sure worked for me, and they’ve been shown on CNN too. There’s a free trial on right now at
acai weightloss , try it out, how worse could it make things?
Multi-task the small things and single-task the big things. I couldn’t agree more. Kowning this is useful. I think multi-task requires us to plan as a whole while single-tasks such as solving math problems need 100% concentration.
Why not do both?
Hi
I read your article with interest.
I recently interviewed Dave Crenshaw who wrote the book “The Myth of Multi-tasking: How Doing It All Gets Nothing Done”. He provided some interesting information and tips in the interview. You can download/listen to the interview here:
http://www.align-lead-inspire.com/public/192.cfm
Warmest wishes
Shelley
Hey Shelley,
Very interesting podcast. Dave provides great insights into the myth of multi-tasking. I had no ideas that there were subcategories to multi-tasking (switch-tasking/background tasking).
Great listen. Thanks for sharing!
solid.
totally solid.
well done on rocking guest post brrrah.
here’s to lording the net